Member of the Funny Name Club

August 21, 2010

Comments on a Love Note (UPDATE: Field Negro Responds and So Do I)

Yesterday, a blogger styling himself as the Field Negro [2014 note: Philadelphia family court Judge Wayne Bennett] dubbed me the "House Negro of the Day":

(JULIETTE OCHIENG) I SWEAR SOME OF YOU NEGROES MUST GET PAID BY THE WORD TO SAY DUMB STUFF. THIS CONSERVATIVE BLOGGER CALLS THE MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO A "SECURITY RISK". SAYING DUMB S#*T JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN IS ALWAYS HNB

[Link added by me; don't worry--it leads to my post, "Beacon."]

Field Negro--may I call you Negro?--would it actually hurt you to expound on why you think my opinion is "dumb?"

Show your lack of "dumbness" by explaining to your readers how building such a mosque--set to be funded and "pastored" by a person who has continually called for the the implementation of Sharia law in the United States--is not a security risk. Take it step by step.

I can further defend my position. Are you capable of defending yours? I'd sure like to read it. You never know--if you're premises are sound and your conclusion follows logically from them, I would be compelled to change my opinion. In case you have never heard of this concept, it's called 'intellectual honesty.' Try it, you'll like it--eventually.

Ms. House Negro, you may call me whatever you like, just as long as you don't call me collect. Now let me "expound" -just a little-on why I think your opinion is dumb:

You argue that putting this Mosque two blocks from Ground Zero would put Americans at risk because the leader of the Mosque believes in a strict form of Islamic law. (Sharia) That, in of itself, is ludicrous. Iam not connecting the dots between an interpretation of an ancient religious philosophy and bombs dropping on suburbia.

And, just for argument sake, let's assume that Faisal Abdul Rauf does believe in the most negative and regressive form of Sharia law as you allege; what difference would it make if he built his Mosque a block from Ground Zero or in Jersey City?

Just because you are unable to connect the dots, it does not follow that my opinion is ludicrous. You may have a shortcoming or two. However, I will assist you.

Islam’s raison d’être is to convert the world to Islam, by force if necessary.One of the tools of force is fear.And inducing fear is the goal of terrorism.

Of course, we know that many Muslims consider the Islamist attacks of September 11, 2001 to be one of Islam’s greatest victories against the United States/Great Satan.Building a mosque adjacent to what used to be the Twin Towers would be like planting a flag of victory for Allah.This is not an unprecedented concept; armies of Islam and many other armies use this sort of symbolism to say to observers the equivalent of “we won; you lost.”In the eyes of others wishing to spread Islam by the “sword,” such a statement would be a…Beacon, one drawing those of like desire; this beacon would encourage other Soldiers for Allah to perpetrate further attacks in America in order to win more victories for Allah, in order to win his blessings and in order to gain glory for themselves.

Does that help?

But my rebuttal above assumes that you were right about Rauf and his position when it comes Sharia Law. You were not. Only a person whose mind has been poisoned by right wing ideology -A poison that was inflicted by the likes of Newt Gingrich- could view a man who has published writings such as this in such spurious and mendacious manner. Parroting right wing talking points to score "brownie points" with your ideological soul mates does not make you a critical thinker, or, for that matter, someone capable of "intellectual honesty". It makes you a fraud, and a fraud of the worse kind: one whose sole purpose in life is to remain in the comfort of a poorly constructed house.

Now it emerges that a “special, non-commercial edition” of this book was later produced, with Feisal’s cooperation, by two American tentacles of the Muslim Brotherhood: the Islamic Society of North America and the International Institute of Islamic Thought.

(…)

Both ISNA and IIIT have been up to their necks in the promotion of Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood’s ruthless Palestinian branch, which is pledged by charter to the destruction of Israel. In fact, both ISNA and IIIT were cited by the Justice Department as unindicted co-conspirators in a crucial terrorism-financing case involving the channeling of tens of millions of dollars to Hamas through an outfit called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. For the last 15 years, Hamas has been a designated terrorist organization under U.S. law.

(…)

The purpose of dawa, like the purpose of jihad, is to implement, spread, and defend sharia.

(…)

In considering Imam Rauf and his Ground Zero project, [Yusuf] Qaradawi [spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood] and the Muslim Brotherhood are extremely important. Like most Muslims, Rauf regards Qaradawi as a guide, and referred to him in 2001 as “the most well-known legal authority in the whole Muslim world today.”

(…)

Qaradawi regards the United States as the enemy of Islam. He has urged that Muslims “fight the American military if we can, and if we cannot, we should fight the U.S. economically and politically.”

A rapidly weakening USA is quickly becoming a target for those who would like to remake it in their own image, whatever that image may be.Right now, this country is just a financial target, but that could change. The giant is ailing and the wolves—like Russia, China, and Islam—are waiting for it to fall.So you might say that the “brownie point” I wish to accrue is survival.

I hope you didn't trip over my steps.

Darling, I’m starting to get the feeling that you don’t like me. My heart is broken to be disliked by such a charming gentleman!:-}

However, I hope that you awaken and decide that you want to survive also.Really. And I hope you save a little bit of that snarl for your real enemy.

I know this is gonna sound crazy, but I'm going to take a wild guess that a dude who calls himself 'Field Negro' and types rants in all-caps is gonna fall way short of the 'rational defense of the mosque' mark.

"Islam’s raison d’être is to convert the world to Islam, by force if necessary. One of the tools of force is fear. And inducing fear is the goal of terrorism."

Interesting. At several points in time, Christians aimed to convert all they could to the religion of the same name. And given your definition of terrorism, you can pin the same indictment on the U.S. Government.

Think for a second. The U.S. Government stands to gain from keeping folks such as yourself in a constant state of heightened emotional distress. It's a lot easier to push, pull and prod people who are emotionally peaked and thus unable to come to more rational thought. That could explain the Tea Party and it definitely explains the U.S. Government's wish to keep people in constant suspense over external and even internal threats.

If you could come down off of the high being caused by the government's scheme to terrorize their own citizens, then you can connect the dots and see how you and others are being emotionally played by both sides of the political aisle, especially over the mosque issue.

Sorry, but Field has you there, and you are the House Negro. Adhere to the tenents of the US Constitution if you truly love this country. Right wing babbletalk is dominating this discussion, and you have been swept in.

The concept of "flag" planting has nothing to do with what form of government we have now. And look at more than the cover; look at the the change of title, the word 'dawa' and the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. This organization wants to change the form of government to a theocracy--an Islamic one.

Many conquerors have, indeed, conquered in the name of Christ. I have expounded on this more than once here. The key is to look back at the rule book. Were such conquerors doing what Jesus Christ wanted or not? The answer to that question is the key for evaluating any religion and for evaluating those who act in the name of a given religion.

What makes my thoughts irrational? Which premise of mine is incorrect or fallacious? Seriously, I'd like to know your opinion.

baldilocks let me "expound" on your posts as well. It would appear that the only thing you understand less about than basic English grammar is Islam.

Now being an atheist I don't give a kipper's dick about islam, but I do care about the truth. You clearly do not. You recycle the lies you copy and paste from anti-Islamic hate sites, but for what purpose I wonder?

You say.. "The purpose of dawa, like the purpose of jihad, is to implement, spread, and defend sharia."

No it isn't, in fact that's not even the purpose of Jihad.

You say," Islam’s raison d’être is to convert the world to Islam, by force if necessary."

Again, bigoted nonsense.

You go on to raise other myths you have learned recently on your trawls through hate-sites, such as the idiotic concept of the "victory mosques".

Do you understand (for instance) that this is to be a Sufi centre? Do you even know that the Wahabbists who murdered 3000 Americans (including several hundred Muslims) on 9/11 don't even consider Sufis to be proper Muslims? - They are largely mystics who are considered the Muslim sect most likely to engage in inter-faith cooperation.

Of course one of teh many things that people like you and :l Qae'da have in common is that you hate the concept of inter-faith cooperation.

I suppose such subtleties are lost on the likes of you. But that's typical of all conservatives, they are as a breed, incapable of nuanced or subtle thinking. For a conservative there is a solution to every problem, that is obvious, simple and dead wrong.

Please point out where my grammar is in error. I sometimes post quickly, as I have many other responsibilities.

My purpose isn't complicated; it is to exhort interested observers to diligently keep watch in order to discern the tactics and strategy employed by the enemies of individual freedom--e.g.,those who would infringe upon your freedom to be an atheist.

I am aware of the existence of the Sufi Muslims. This is the first I have heard that the mosque would be Sufi. Do you have a link to confirm this?

And how do you know that hate the concept of inter-faith co-operation? Which one of my statements indicates this? Or are you merely making assumptions based on your own preconceived notions?

I suppose such subtleties are lost on the likes of you. But that's typical of all conservatives, they are as a breed, incapable of nuanced or subtle thinking.

This statement is an affirmative answer to my last question.

I'll repeat to you what I said to Field Negro: I hope that you awaken sufficiently enough to discern who your real enemy is. Hint: it isn't me.

You, and people who think like you are absolutely my number one enemy. You seek to demonize a billion people of a faith that you clearly have no understanding of. I am implacably opposed to people who spread bigotry through lies such a yours, and I always will be.

I guess you figure it worked for Adolf Hitler and the Jews, why not try and blame Muslims for everything wrong in the world? But it's not going to work, outside of the USA the human race is too well informed and too sophisticated these days to simply take on your hate speech without questioning it. You are on a lost cause.

I know many Muslims, you, I suspect have never met one. I work with them, I socialize with them, I play cricket with them. I'm not saying they are all wonderful people, because they are not. They are simply, normal people, by and large decent people, people just like me (but not you) who are simply trying to get by the best they can. Not one has ever tried to convince me to start believing in God, let alone convert to Islam. Yet if we believed your deranged rantings we would have to believe every Muslim is bent on World domination through Islam.

I would do everything to help my friends no matter their religion or the colour of their skin. On the other hand I wouldn't piss on the likes of you if you were on fire.

And people like you seem to think that anyone who disagrees with another is the enemy of the latter.

Your suspicions--as with the countless other unfounded assumptions in your two comments--are wrong. I have family members who are Muslims. I used to be one. Of course every individual Muslim does not want to infringe on the freedom of non-Muslims. I'd even wager that most do not. However, many of Islam's leadership entities do and have expressly said so. The Muslim Brotherhood is but one example.

Any inference of genocide from anything I say has the voices in your head as the source. That you want to project them onto me sounds like ...hmmm....demonization. I thought you said demonization was bad. Please make up your deluded mind.

You enjoy arguing with your own prejudices quite a bit, don't you? Of course, that is your right. However, please stop pretending that you're arguing with me, the individual.

And if you pissed on me, I'd retaliate in a method which would be far more painful that the acid that comes out of either end of your body. Just saying.

I don't know how you can stand talking to these people. All they do is repeat over and over the same lies that have been said by leftist appeasers of Islam (as well as by Muslims who hide their allegiance -- easy enough to do on the internet) for the past nine years. I used to take these people on too -- but I just got tired. Their minds are not so much closed as they were never open in the first place.

The truth is, after the World Trade center attack, Americans dutifully tried to figure out what we had done to make these people hate us so. We consulted books on Islam and the Middle East. We formed committees and had endless talking head shows on tv. Tons of blogs were formed, inspired by the atrocity on September 11, 2001. We tried to find out more about these jihadist Muslims who thought it was a good thing to attack a foreign country that had helped them so much. And you know what we found out? A lot of stuff a lot of Muslims didn't want us to. Like how they treat each other. Like their plans for everyone. Like what their holy book really instructs them to do. And ever since Muslims and their useful idiots have been trying to clean up the damage, telling is "those books were lies," or "you're too stupid and prejudiced to understand what you read" and so on. But we aren't buying it.

You said, "And people like you seem to think that anyone who disagrees with another is the enemy of the latter."

No, what i am saying is that a person who demonizes others by spreading easily disproved lies, is an enemy of the human race. I don't hate people who disagree with me, some of my best friends are Conservatives.

O.K. that's an exaggeration - some of the people I get on fairly well with are conservatives.

You said.. "However, many of Islam's leadership entities do and have expressly said so." Also nonsense, and certainly not anything a Sufi mullah would have anything to do with.

You said "Any inference of genocide from anything I say has the voices in your head as the source. That you want to project them onto me sounds like ...hmmm....demonization."

[ English isn't your native language is it?]

I have not sought to infer that you support genocide, as far as I know, you do not. My point is that the process you are going through is precisely the same that Hitler championed. You seek out a minority, you single them out as having some secret scheme to take over the world and you blame all the world's evils on them. Right-wingers like you and old Adolf need a boogy man to make their politics work. In the 1930's and '40's it was the Jews, in the 1950's through to the '80's it was the Communists "reds under the bed". Now it's Islam's turn.

If you have a perceived enemy, you can use the war on the perceived enemy to justify the restrictions on human freedom and human rights and human dignity that right wing politics demands. Anyone who stands up for rationality and human dignity can then be dismissed as being a jewlover/fellowtraveler/ragheadlover/soft-on-terrorism etc etc.

You've done it yourself on this very website "Islam is the enemy" you said. Well no it isn't. Irrationality is the enemy, bigotry is the enemy, hatred is the enemy, racism is the enemy. Not Islam.

I don't accept Islam as a religion. It's a political ideology of oppression, misogyny and totalarianism on par with Maoism and Lenninism. In the 1960's in my mainline Protestant faith we were required to study other world religions before taking confirmation - and we did not study Islam. It was viewed as an alternative political system/empire and one at complete odds with the concepts of western democracy and justice....not a religion.

I don't accept Islam as a religion. It's a political ideology of oppression, misogyny and totalarianism on par with Maoism and Lenninism. In the 1960's in my mainline Protestant faith we were required to study other world religions before taking confirmation - and we did not study Islam. It was viewed as an alternative political system/empire and one at complete odds with the concepts of western democracy and justice....not a religion.

I heard somewhere that Prince al-Waleed game Iman Rauf some money. Oh my God that means that Fox and Newscorps is financing terror. News Corps second largest owner is Prince al-Waleed. Murdoch is a terrorist!

Right now this very minute Iman Rauf is working for the State Department trying to calm things down in the Mideast. Many journalist said on Sunday that the Right-White wing bigotry to Islam is a threat to national security. At Daniel Perle's funeral Iman Rauf said "I am a Jew." He's also a Sufi Muslim.

Next time get your lies straight.Maybe you don't know that Stromfront and their friends on the Right are trying to start a racewar. BTW, are you going to Glenn Beck's eff Dr. King rally in DC? He has Gov. Satan Pagan and Ted Nugent the guy that said at one of his concerts "I'm glad white people are here."

Having a "president" that is viewed as weak and emasculated, who goes on a world apology tour condemning the US, who failes to elucidate a clear ME policy, let alone a strategy, who leaves "Advisor" teams behind in Iraq without the US combat support they need to be safe and effective, puts our troops more at risk than any online discussion about what Islam actually is. Get real.

For someone who claims to be such an intellectual, you threw your argument early in the game by defaulting to the tedious, yet predictable, "Hitler" meme. And FYI, Hitler got his ideas about eugenics, propaganda, and division tactics from American Progressives like Ivy Lee and Edward Bernays... whose shopworn tactics have been recycled by Alinsky and now Obama and Co. Yawn.

Thank you for posting an interesting defense of your views. I agree that the mosque, whether of brick & mortar, or just as a concept, is a victory monument for Islam. Victory monuments, whether the Arch of Triumph in Paris, or the multitudinous statues of Nike, or holy graves in Luxembourg are of a nature that no one questions their purpose to mark the defeat of an enemy. Likewise, this mosque provides Islam an either/or victory that no one in Islam will question.

If built and used, Muslims the world over will see it as proof of the supremacy of their religion. They will be inspired to continue their efforts. Or, should the mosque not be built, and remain a concept, it will be proof of the fear of the unbelievers of the supremacy of Islam. Muslims will be inspired to redouble their efforts to ensure that the next a mosque is built, it’s on the grounds of the White House. This battle over the mosque is not directed at Americans – it is directed at Muslims all over the world.

What I find bothersome is the tacit admission by the mosque’s supporters that the Imam misrepresented himself, his co-religionists, and the mosque and that such misrepresentations are perfectly acceptable – not because supporters believe that in and of itself lying is morally acceptable, but because the misrepresentation has been called out by the political enemies of the mosque’s supporters. That level of contempt toward one’s fellow citizens, co-religionists, and fellow human beings is breath-taking!

Calling it an Islamic centre with a prayer space, a spa, and swimming pool, meeting rooms, a 9/11 memorial (!), an auditorium, a basketball court, several classrooms, and an exhibition space - to be located two blocks away and around a corner from ground zero, at a site Muslims are already using for prayers - doesn't have quite the impact as calling it "the mosque at ground zero", but nevertheless, that's the truth of the matter.

So It ain't a mosque, it especially ain't a 'victory mosque' (there are no such things as victory mosques they are an invention of Islamophobes.) It's a cultural center that has already been used for Islamic prayer since last year, without negative comment from anyone as overspill from the real mosque that is about 12 blocks away.

But hey, let's not let anything as inconvenient as 'facts' get in the way of a good bigoted rant, shall we?

[Quote:Karen Stonehouse]For someone who claims to be such an intellectual, you threw your argument early in the game by defaulting to the tedious, yet predictable, "Hitler" meme.[/quote]

I have never characterized myself as intellectual. I just seem intellectual when compared to the likes of you. But then next to you, even Sarah Palin would look sharp.

The Hitler comparison is entirely justified. You are going through the same process, and for exactly the same reason.

Calling it an Islamic centre with a prayer space, a spa, and swimming pool, meeting rooms, a 9/11 memorial (!), an auditorium, a basketball court, several classrooms, and an exhibition space - to be located two blocks away and around a corner from ground zero, at a site Muslims are already using for prayers - doesn't have quite the impact as calling it "the mosque at ground zero", but nevertheless, that's the truth of the matter.

So It ain't a mosque, it especially ain't a 'victory mosque' (there are no such things as victory mosques they are an invention of Islamophobes.) It's a cultural center that has already been used for Islamic prayer since last year, without negative comment from anyone as overspill from the real mosque that is about 12 blocks away.

But hey, let's not let anything as inconvenient as 'facts' get in the way of a good bigoted rant, shall we?

[Quote:Karen Stonehouse]For someone who claims to be such an intellectual, you threw your argument early in the game by defaulting to the tedious, yet predictable, "Hitler" meme.[/quote]

I have never characterized myself as intellectual. I just seem intellectual when compared to the likes of you. But then next to you, even Sarah Palin would look sharp.

The Hitler comparison is entirely justified. You are going through the same process, and for exactly the same reason.

The Great Mosque of Cordoba, Spain. It is now a Roman Catholic church.

Hagia Sophia, Instanbul, Turkey. It was Christian church.

Al-Aqsa Mosque, Jerusalem, Israel. It was built on the site of the Jewish Temple.

Ferhat-Pasha Mosque, Banja Luca, Bosnia-Herzegovina. I recall the town being pretty shot up.

Great Mosque of Kairouan, Kairouan, Tunisia

Babri Mosque, India. Damaged by Hindus in the early 1990s, it was built on the site of a Hindu holy site by a Moghul conqueror.

Badshahi Mosque, Lahore, Pakistan.

As an aside, if one is interested in architecture and art, recommend checking these out.

I see Godwin's Law invoked blahblahblah et cetera ad nauseum without the usual disclaimers of the Muslim SS divisions and the involvement of the Grand Mufti. What is it with the armies of Muslim nations (not all) goose-stepping? Marching ought not be so un-natural. Typing of nazism, what is interesting is the current level of research, so far with perhaps too much conjecture, on the Mufti's influence on Hitler in conceiving the "Final Solution."

So DaveO, while you are busy re-writing history in such an amusing manner, I would like to know how your deeply 'alternative' view of history copes with the 490,000 North African Muslims who fought for the Free French Army to help rid the World of fascism?

No less an authority than U.S. 4-star general mark Clark described their efforts as "magnificent".

By definition, “Free French Army” was composed of any French individuals and units that fought against the Axis forces following the armistice (surrender) of France in 1940. The French Army of Africa under General Giraud fought against the Axis, but was not part of what is popularly known as the Free French Army under General de Gaulle.
The Free French Forces consisted of colonial African and other non-Caucasian men drawn from Senegal (West, not North African), Tahiti (not North African), Algeria (very North African), and other African colonies. Large numbers of these troops were Muslim, Christian, and animist. The process of “blanchement” (whitening) of the Free French Army began with the re-capture of Paris in 1944, and continued through 1945 as more Caucasian Frenchmen joined or rejoined the fight.
Est-ce qu'ainsi, comment quelque chose que je va avoir dit emportez du sacrifice des musulmans dans la cause de la France sur il y a 65 ans ?
Also found in World War II, Muslims fighting for the Nazis and fascist Italians:
In eastern African (south of Egypt) There were roughly 182,000 Askari (African troops coming from Eritrean, Ethiopian, and Somalia) fighting for then-fascist Italy. The religions of these troops were Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and animist.
Deutsch-Arabische Lehr Abteilung(Arabian Volunteers)
Deutsch-Arabisches Bataillon Nr 845 (Arab Volunteers)
Osttürkischer Waffen-Verband der SS or Ostmuselmanisches SS-Regiment (Arabs, Turks and other Middle East volunteers)
Freiwilligen-Stamm-Regiment 1 (Turks volunteers)
Azerbajdjanische Legion or Kaukasisch-Mohammedanische Legion (Azerbaijani volunteer16 (Turkistan) Infanterie-Division (Turkestani Volunteers)
Muselmanischen SS-Division Neu-Turkistan (Turkestani volunteers)
Turkestanische Legion (volunteers from Central Asia Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Turkomen, Dagestanis and Chechens).
Böhler-Brigade (Turkestani volunteers)
Turkestanisches-Arbeits-Battalion (Turkestani volunteers)
Turkestanisches-Arbeits-Battalion (Turkestani volunteers)
Turkestanisches-Arbeits-Battalion (Turkestani volunteers)
Turkestanisches-Arbeits-Ersatz-Battalion (Turkestani volunteers)
Waffen-Gruppe Turkistan (Central Asian volunteers)
My source comes from wikipedia.com (it was readily available and used to provide a response).

Ms. Stone - I will respectfully disagree with your assertion that Islam as another form of politics. Islam does not, in and of itself, restrict democracy, plutocracy, theocracy, socialism or communism. Those systems are more an attribute of a Muslim's culture. Looking forward to your response!

@ The Purple Cow! Please keep the contradictions coming. It's quite entertaining. I can't tell if you are winning the argument against yourself or in the process of being defeated? I'll be tuning in tomorrow to see what happens!

The stuff you copied and pasted (and of course, carefully edited) entirely misses the point. Let me do my own cutting and pasting from Wikipedia, to demonstrate what i mean.

"During World War II more than 300,000 Moroccan troops (including goumier auxiliaries) served with the Free French forces in North Africa, Italy, France and Austria. The two world conflicts saw Moroccan units earning the nickname of "Todesschwalben" (death swallows) by German soldiers as they showed particular toughness on the battlefield."

Hard to fit that in with your thesis isn't it? Anyway I'm still waiting for an answer to my question, and I have infinite patience.

Imadweeb, if you would remove your tongue from DaveO's rectum long enough to look around you, you will see that all the contradictions are coming from your general direction.

I knew it would be hard educating closed minds, and no minds anywhere are more closed than those of the religious bigot. Nevertheless I am a patient man.

"The process of “blanchement” (whitening) of the Free French Army began with the re-capture of Paris in 1944."

Wrong. The process of blanchement began when the Allied Supreme Command requested it BEFORE the re-capture of Paris. They thought it would look bad if a large number of brothers marched in victory down the Champs-Élysées you see.

You've been busy since I last stopped to read. Now, I've got a whole lot of catching up to do. I don't see how any American can support this mosque. There's already an assload of them, and they haven't done anything to promote good relations. So why do we need a big one in an obviously touchy place? It sure as hell isn't to improve communication or foster goodwill.

Hey Purple Cow, with any further jesting aside, you have been quite the busy little bee. Belittling the opinions of others and mocking them with childish insults, AND... calling those who disagree with your views as "narrow minded bigots", sigh... what intellectual debating skills you have acquired from diaper school! Not too worry, though. It takes a lot more then your petty insults to get under my skin! Not really interested in trading barbs with you anyways...

About the issue, while you have been busy seeing right wing Nazis behind every little bush in the US, normal everyday folks, with little concern for ideology, have been voicing their opinions of why this building should not be located near such a tragic site! Whether you and i agree on this issue really doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

The real issue is, as far as i can tell, is that the majority of people do not trust the owners intention? Especially in light of the warped version of Islamic history in treating the feelings of others which they feel they had inconsiderately conquered as irrelevant. In other words Mr. Cow, the mosque, Cordoba house, Park51 or whatever else one wants to call it, is not the entire issue. The other part that is usually left out in the progressive media narrative, is the concerns many ordinary folks have that it will be used as a place for Islamic radicalization instead of dialogue and understanding? Are you not aware of the the spread of Islamic radicalization going on in many places where Muslims worship, has spread all over the globe in the past thirty years? Even innocent Muslims themselves themselves have been brutalized by this monstrosity! I ask, because i feel that you are not aware, or you are aware but choose to ignore the cancer that is possibly bound to destroy entire civilizations in the coming future.

I ask you, what do liberals (For want of better term) get out of ignoring all sides in favor of advancing their particular politically correct ideology?

Possibly bound too destroy??? Yes! That is what i had meant. If you are so ideologically blinkered by your socialist utopia in noticing what is happening in Sudan... is against the basics of your beliefs, then there is no hope for you in understanding any other point of views?

And as far as insulting my grammar, i really don't care how insulting you become. I am still willing enough in conversing with you as long as you wish to do so with me? If my grammar is even a remote problem for you, then tough! Nobody is forcing you too have a discussion with me or others here and i would not be offended in the least if it were to stop. I simply haven't the time too proof read everything i type into my computer in a day.

Lastly, yes i do know the difference between the two. I also recognize the difference between accommodation and an arrogant bullying attitude! This would not even be an issue worth discussing if they moved the site into the middle of Manhattan. It would still be close enough in reaching out to the community by commemorating the sad tragedy with their expression of sorrow, but far enough away so as not to do any harm to the sensibilities of those they claim to care for.

Now, if you weren't so busy in trying too prove your supposedly superior intellect by trying too squash those you assume to have a lower self esteem, simply because of some inferiority complex you may have, then you might find that many of us haven't a problem in discussing issues with people who have so widely divergent views than US Conservatives, such as yourself? Snobbery simply is not tolerated!

"Lastly, yes i do know the difference between the two. I also recognize the difference between accommodation and an arrogant bullying attitude!"

Imadweed, I think you are living in an irony-free zone. All the bullying is from the jack-booted bigots of the political and religious Right.

I haven't seen any of you guys discussing the burning of the Quran. You are all strangely silent on that score. Your christian holy dude has a constitutional right to burn his copy of the Quran, just as the Imam has a constitutional right to build his 'mosque'.

("Imadweed, I think you are living in an irony-free zone. All the bullying is from the jack-booted bigots of the political and religious Right.")

You say that with such conviction. I'll be sure to tell Howard Dean and any other Democrat who do not support the mosque location, what you had said. I'm sure they will be very thrilled by your assessment of them.

("I haven't seen any of you guys discussing the burning of the Quran. You are all strangely silent on that score.")

Chronology of events might have something to do with that. The Mosque issue came up first, so it just stands to reason that would be discussed first. Personally i am against the burning of the Quran mainly for the sake and safety of our troops. Others just might disagree with my view on the subject and that is just fine! Now whether the pastor ever decides to go ahead with it in the future, i hope he realizes that he will have a pretty pissed off country right at his doorstep, alongside his buddy Fred Phelps!?

"You say that with such conviction. I'll be sure to tell Howard Dean and any other Democrat who do not support the mosque location, what you had said. I'm sure they will be very thrilled by your assessment of them."

Go ahead and tell 'em, I've got no time for Democrats. To me a right-of-centre Democrat like Obama is no better, and of no more use, than a hard-Right conservative.

You are either part of the solution or part of the problem, and Democrats are the solution to nothing that I know of.